I am puzzled on multiple fronts by this email. Was the Harvard law class not a randomly chosen class of law students, but a group of people who had met in order to make waterboarding sound legal in public discourse? Because otherwise I don't see the analogy. The only other people CM has 'banned' are people following Zeq's instructions and who give their accounts away in the "evidence", or were editing, clearly disruptively, from the CAMERA office. I'm sure the former, at least, could have their bans lifted if they repudiated the supposed methods and agreed to some form of mentorship. On the contrary, the attitude has been "yes, so what. Why can't you see, Wikipedia is biased, why aren't you worried about what the other lot are doing, we're just trying to fix it, are you on *their* side?" which is precisely the attitude we don't really have time for.
I wouldn't call that enormous subpage of AN/I "not much review", but whatever.
RR
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 9:06 PM, Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
The whole rush to ban anyone associated with this group is disturbing, and not receiving much in the way of review. Christiano has so far blocked two editors and topic banned another one for a year, based on what in my mind is a non-review of their actual edits. This reminds me of the Harvard class involved in editing the Waterboarding article - some of the same people, in fact. We don't ban people for having a point of view. Having a point of view isn't a violation of WP:NOT#BATTLEGROUND. We don't ban people for knowing eachother off wiki, or sharing a point of view that they discuss off-wiki. We don't ban people for being associated with strange people like Zeq, who claimed to marshal an "army" to go to "war" on Wikipedia in the e-mail that is attributed to him. Or we shouldn't, anyway, since now apparently we do ban people for these reasons. What makes this more problematic is that the folks being banned are ostensibly pro-Israel POV warriors - and the "evidence" against them consists of e-mails represented on electronicintifada.com, a very strongly anti-Israel and pro-Palestinian activist organization. I put quotes around evidence because there barely is any evidence on that page except the efforts of junior amateur sleuths trying to connect editors to e-mail addresses.
Nathan
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 11:05 AM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 23/04/2008, Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net wrote:
I think the push by CAMERA is probably a reaction to the gradual
movement
of articles which relate to the Arab-Israeli toward neutral point of view. We just need to keep that up, not panic about organized efforts.
We
have alway had to deal with disorganized efforts.
I question the blogosphere "o noez the zionists are coming" response's sanity factor based on fingering Jayjg as an agent of CAMERA. Er, what.
- d.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l